Are you seriously arguing that the DNC didn't promote Clinton over Sanders at every opportunity? And encourage the media to do the same? Always adding in the superdelegates to Clinton's totals to make it look like Sanders was a lost cause was a prime example of voter suppression.
As opposed to keeping your foot on the necks of those beneath you by maintaining the status quo? From the point of view of the 99%, there,s no real difference.
Despite all her "experience" that she was always bragging about, she didn't exactly have much in the way of positive accomplishments to point to. Did she have any?
This one is entirely on the DNC. They could have run almost anyone - the gay couple from "Modern Family", a socialist (Bernie! Bernie!), a college teacher or stay-at-home mom picked at random, and had a better chance of winning. But no, they picked the one candidate who was widely seen as the least trustworthy, with a history of lies and flip-flops.
And somebody who could not point to a single positive accomplishment in all those "years of experience in politics". Anyone could have beaten Clinton. Want proof? Trump beat her. A frigging has-been reality tv star beat her. Let that sink in for a bit.
And now, people who were suing to remove the Trump name from buildings are kicking themselves for dumping what has become overnight the most powerful symbol of, well, power. Making Trump president is entirely on the DNC.
Seriously? Reagan was a superstitious old fart who permanently screwed up the economy with deregulation and "trickle-down economics", as well as reversing the decline of the national debt. The mortgage crisis is also his responsibility.
The immediate effect of Garn-St. Germain, as I said, was to turn the thrifts from a problem into a catastrophe. The S.& L. crisis has been written out of the Reagan hagiography, but the fact is that deregulation in effect gave the industry — whose deposits were federally insured — a license to gamble with taxpayers’ money, at best, or simply to loot it, at worst. By the time the government closed the books on the affair, taxpayers had lost $130 billion, back when that was a lot of money.
But there was also a longer-term effect. Reagan-era legislative changes essentially ended New Deal restrictions on mortgage lending - restrictions that, in particular, limited the ability of families to buy homes without putting a significant amount of money down.
These restrictions were put in place in the 1930s by political leaders who had just experienced a terrible financial crisis, and were trying to prevent another. But by 1980 the memory of the Depression had faded. Government, declared Reagan, is the problem, not the solution; the magic of the marketplace must be set free. And so the precautionary rules were scrapped.
Together with looser lending standards for other kinds of consumer credit, this led to a radical change in American behavior.
Thank him for the huge inequities that exist today.
Vote for the damn issues, AND, whatever or whoever serves their ACTUALLY HAPPENING, however incrementally.
This means NO THIRD PARTY shit, NO PROTEST VOTES, PARTICIPATING IN PRIMARIES, and VOTING FOR ONE OF THE TWO.
FUCK.
Really? Vote for lhe lesser of two evils ignoring all other options? So you'd vote for either Putin or Bashar al-Assad if they were the top two candidates? Idiot. That just means nothing changes, and many voters can be taken for granted.
The CBC allows not-for-profit distribution. The apps in question are monetizing the podcasts by showing ads, a violation of the CBCs terms of use of the material. Since the apps in question then don't have a license to distribute, they are guilty of copyright infringement. You can't distribute without a license, and you have to obey the terms of the license - that holds just as true here as with the GPL.
So all you f*ckhead who are getting all indignant without checking the facts, grow up.
Or maybe they are playing like chess players, setting up something that looks like it's the champs computers, not TOO easy to break into, and filled with misleading tactics and analysis. Not even a pawn sacrifice.
Back in the '90s Nantucket Software/Clipper distributed binary patches along with a program named patch. I don't know if they were distributing it in the '80s, however. Microsoft is really, really behind the times on patching binaries.
They finally got around to copying Larry Wall's "patch" command more than 30 years later. What was so hard? It's been open source since 1985. Oh, right - open source is a cancer.
The attack was said to be upwards of 1.1Tbps -- more than double the attack a few weeks earlier on security reporter Brian Krebs' website, which was about 620Gbps in size,
It's easy enough to do in your head - 1.1Tbps is less than half 620.Gbps. It would have had to be more than 1.24 Tbps, more than 10% larger than the claimed "upwards of 1.1Tbps", and there's no indication in the original story that it ever got anywhere near that high. Aside from satellite connections, the single fibre connection s the only way in or out. That is confirmed by the article stating that the attack was directed against one of the two companies cooperatively operating the fibre.
One transit provider said the attacks were over 500Gbps in size.
So from the story, it's an attack on one company, and Level 3 reported far less.
In an email, Dale Drew, chief security officer at Level 3 Communications, confirmed it had "witnessed an attack against a telecommunications company in Liberia" from the Mirai botnet.
Far less than 1.24 Tbps, and no facts cited to even make it more than 620 Gbps. There is no actual data in the article to justify the claimed size, irrespective of the bad math. So, Zack Whittaker at ZDNet needs to go back to school to learn basic math and to not include speculative figures that he made out of his head, without citing any facts to justify them, in his clickbait "reports."
F'ing internet. This is a story worthy of Facebook, not slashdot... at least not the old slashdot at the turn of the century.
Again, read what I wrote4. I never said that there is no such thing as corrupt unions, just that they're needed to counterbalance the power of corporations in our current oligarchy. And even Jimmy Carter admits that the US is an oligarchy - which was inevitable with the Citizens United judgment. You now get the best (if you're a business owner) government money can buy.
Also, you are either incredibly naive or incredibly stupid to write "Once a union has achieved the purpose for which it was formed, it should be disbanded". If that were the case, we could disband the fire department once there are no fires, the police department once we go a while with no crime, the FAA when we go a year with no crashes, etc. Companies do not miraculously have a "come to Jeebus" moment and go forth and sin no more.
And no, it's non-union companies that have a short6er lifetime, because there are so many more of them. They never achieve the critical mass to have a union, but that doesn't prevent them from closing up shop because they're simply not competitive. 8 out of 10 businesses fail within 18 months
According to Bloomberg, 8 out of 10 entrepreneurs who start businesses fail within the first 18 months. A whopping 80% crash and burn.
We don't here of most of them because they're (1) small, (2) haven't been around long enough to make a dent in the market, (3) are shoestring operations, which never get to the point where the operators see the need for incorporating because it's not doing well enough to even bother making that investment.
As for stating "What good does that serve any worker?" - I was a member of the steelworkers and they definitely negotiated better working conditions and pay, and the company not only survived, it grew. Also, I was one person away from the legal minimum to receive legal recognition as a programmer's union. I failed because others were afraid of reprisals, even though there are fines for reprisals, etc., and compensation paid to affected employees. Most programmers are chicken-shit; serves them right when they have to train their overseas replacements to take over their jobs.
Work-alikes are allowed. However, in the case you cite they also copied creative elements that are non-functional in terms of copyright, such as the size of the field and the shape of the blocks. Using pentominoes instead of tetrominoes would be non-infringing. The underlying game play would be the same, and it's not like they can copyright the rules of the game - the USPTO says that the actual rules cannot be copyrighted - they are facts. Only the expression of those rules (the words used to describe the rules) can be copyrighted - anyone can publish the same rules using different words.
Considering the mix of Window, Frame, and JFrame classes, it should be cleaned up by just having Dialog and Window classes, same as other languages, with the JFrame and Frame being subsumed by Window, and Window being replaced by Dialog. There are plenty of other "mistakes" wrt naming.
Interfaces are terrible. THEY are the kluge, not interfaces. Also, you seem to think that multiple inheritance is a bar to using composition when it's not. It's the balance between the two that reduces the need for going to one extreme of the other.
Also, the gang of four are full of shit. You can take anything too far, and they are a great example of that. Their "design patterns" is a trap. It invites rigidity in design and implementation that gets in the way of doing the right thing. Same as Java's moronic "everything is a class" approach is equally a straight jacket that invites class explosion.
You're living in the past, and probably have never belonged to a union..Unions frequently represent every non-management employee, not just one specific position or trade. And if the company can't afford to pay a living wage, why should they exist? Someone else will come along and take their customers, and if they don't pay a living wage the process will just repeat itself until competition is reduced enough, or they become more efficient, and can pay a living wage.
Power structures do indeed corrupt, which is why unions are needed to counterbalance the power of employers.
It's not inevitable. When a company dies, for example, the local union also ceases to exist. It's the union version of creative destruction - something better just might come out of the wreckage.
And if you don't like the corruption, then run, FFS, instead of just whining about it. And if it isn't your union, then STFU, because it's not your duty to save others from their own cowardice and stupidity. They will have to learn the hard way, and you are interfering with the process, keeping them dependent on outside help.
We ARE rational actors. When we stick our finger into a lightbulb socket, we eventually learn not to do it because we are rational. We see the connection between the act and the pain.
As someone who, as a child, used to repeatedly stick his fingers into a specific wall socket whenever we'd go to visit our "rural country" relations I can vouch that THAT is not a good example of human rationality.
Do you still do it? If not, is it because you're aware of what can happen? If so, you are acting rationally.
Our hardest decisions require us to do what's rational despite what our emotions say. I didn't want to put my 13-year-old dog down, but I let rationality win over emotion.
But it still hurt emotionally, didn't it?
Sure but the point is, despite the emotional pain, we can, and do, act rationally.
BTW, rationality doesn't require a sane mind. People who are held to be non criminally responsible can still act rationally, same as those who suffer from delusions. Just not in all areas.
it gets hard to simply form coherent sentences when enraged
If that's the case for you, I would suggest you seek help. I certainly have no problem forming complete, rational sentences under the worst conditions, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.
Knowing one's own errors and limitations does not mean being free of them. Particularly when they are a central part of the whole "being human" thing.
My dog died a couple of weeks ago. He was 13, and I had him since he was a puppy. Even while I'm sitting with him as they inject the drugs, I'm making a point of using what I learned from my cognitive behavioral therapist to realize that my thinking was distorted. He had a good life, and the 4000+ days we were together far, far outweighed the last few hours (and the last few hours were inevitable anyway - I knew that he wouldn't make it through another winter).
We most certainly can control our emotions. Just takes the right training. CBT is the only real working therapy for PTSD because it DOES let you control your emotions by seeing how things really are, rather than focusing on the immediate anxiety and distress.
Of course, there are times when just saying "Fuck you" and walking away is the best reaction. It is the quickest way to ensure you don't re-engage with assholes. Emotional responses can also be rational responses, if they achieve the desired outcome. And achieving the desired, optimal outcome is the only valid measuring stick for both rational and emotional responses.
"Android Java" was never designed to create Java applications, and to this day it doesn't. Think of it as a cross-compiler. And killing off the cumbersome Java API and the need for interfaces because Java lacks multiple inheritance would be a good thing.
So just don't call it Java. It's not like the whole thing can't be reverse engineered, same as the original IBM PC BIOS was. And while doing so, clean up all the sh*t in the "complete implementation including all its required interfaces and functionality." Add a macro preprocessor and the ability to have executable functions outside of any class (why not??? Many languages manage that) and who cares? It will be obviously so not like Java in it's way of working (where everything is a class is a crappy model, made worse by interfaces instead of multiple inheritance) and compile to real platform-specific binaries FTW.
Since (only a subset of) the Java language is used to produce byte code for the ART, and not Java classes, there's no reason that Google can't just use only a subset of another language to the same effect - C++, Object Pascal, even a bastardized version of BASIC or Hypercard/Hypertalk and its descendants. Or something completely new...
How else would I prove interconnections between political surrogates, then?
Whether you can prove it or not won't change anything. Not even if the whole world just accepts it uncritically at face value. As such, it's irrelevant to all those who don't want to invest their time in mental masturbation. You're as bad as the SJWs. And as irrelevant.
Since the database of public filings, financial disclosures, and members of boards of directors is of necessity not complete, then the "deductions" reflect the biases of the people who curated the data.
You go on and on about communism being a failed ideology. You ignore socialism, probably because it's more responsive to the will of the people than either communism or capitalism. Why?
And what the hell does communism have to do with Muslims? There's no correlation.
with the full support of western leftist feminists..
I guess you didn't get the memo. 1st wave, 2nd wave, and 3rd wave feminism are dead. 4th wave is just irrelevant except to those who make coin fomenting stupidity. The rest of us just want people to treat each other as equals regardless of gender, without resorting to the all-to-frequent male-bashing.
Slashdot Mirror
Are you seriously arguing that the DNC didn't promote Clinton over Sanders at every opportunity? And encourage the media to do the same? Always adding in the superdelegates to Clinton's totals to make it look like Sanders was a lost cause was a prime example of voter suppression.
It will be interesting to see what they do with that power in the upcoming years.
My guess is gloat then fuck everybody.
And you think it would have been different if Clinton had won? Quelle naiveté.
As opposed to keeping your foot on the necks of those beneath you by maintaining the status quo? From the point of view of the 99%, there,s no real difference.
Despite all her "experience" that she was always bragging about, she didn't exactly have much in the way of positive accomplishments to point to. Did she have any?
This one is entirely on the DNC. They could have run almost anyone - the gay couple from "Modern Family", a socialist (Bernie! Bernie!), a college teacher or stay-at-home mom picked at random, and had a better chance of winning. But no, they picked the one candidate who was widely seen as the least trustworthy, with a history of lies and flip-flops.
And somebody who could not point to a single positive accomplishment in all those "years of experience in politics". Anyone could have beaten Clinton. Want proof? Trump beat her. A frigging has-been reality tv star beat her. Let that sink in for a bit.
And now, people who were suing to remove the Trump name from buildings are kicking themselves for dumping what has become overnight the most powerful symbol of, well, power. Making Trump president is entirely on the DNC.
The immediate effect of Garn-St. Germain, as I said, was to turn the thrifts from a problem into a catastrophe. The S.& L. crisis has been written out of the Reagan hagiography, but the fact is that deregulation in effect gave the industry — whose deposits were federally insured — a license to gamble with taxpayers’ money, at best, or simply to loot it, at worst. By the time the government closed the books on the affair, taxpayers had lost $130 billion, back when that was a lot of money.
But there was also a longer-term effect. Reagan-era legislative changes essentially ended New Deal restrictions on mortgage lending - restrictions that, in particular, limited the ability of families to buy homes without putting a significant amount of money down.
These restrictions were put in place in the 1930s by political leaders who had just experienced a terrible financial crisis, and were trying to prevent another. But by 1980 the memory of the Depression had faded. Government, declared Reagan, is the problem, not the solution; the magic of the marketplace must be set free. And so the precautionary rules were scrapped.
Together with looser lending standards for other kinds of consumer credit, this led to a radical change in American behavior.
Thank him for the huge inequities that exist today.
Vote for the damn issues, AND, whatever or whoever serves their ACTUALLY HAPPENING, however incrementally.
This means NO THIRD PARTY shit, NO PROTEST VOTES, PARTICIPATING IN PRIMARIES, and VOTING FOR ONE OF THE TWO.
FUCK.
Really? Vote for lhe lesser of two evils ignoring all other options? So you'd vote for either Putin or Bashar al-Assad if they were the top two candidates? Idiot. That just means nothing changes, and many voters can be taken for granted.
So all you f*ckhead who are getting all indignant without checking the facts, grow up.
Or maybe they are playing like chess players, setting up something that looks like it's the champs computers, not TOO easy to break into, and filled with misleading tactics and analysis. Not even a pawn sacrifice.
look at morgan fairchild for a while.
Why? I'm not a lesbian ...
I only noticed that I reversed it after - no "edit" function. My bad :-)
Back in the '90s Nantucket Software/Clipper distributed binary patches along with a program named patch. I don't know if they were distributing it in the '80s, however. Microsoft is really, really behind the times on patching binaries.
They finally got around to copying Larry Wall's "patch" command more than 30 years later. What was so hard? It's been open source since 1985. Oh, right - open source is a cancer.
The attack was said to be upwards of 1.1Tbps -- more than double the attack a few weeks earlier on security reporter Brian Krebs' website, which was about 620Gbps in size,
It's easy enough to do in your head - 1.1Tbps is less than half 620.Gbps. It would have had to be more than 1.24 Tbps, more than 10% larger than the claimed "upwards of 1.1Tbps", and there's no indication in the original story that it ever got anywhere near that high. Aside from satellite connections, the single fibre connection s the only way in or out. That is confirmed by the article stating that the attack was directed against one of the two companies cooperatively operating the fibre.
One transit provider said the attacks were over 500Gbps in size.
So from the story, it's an attack on one company, and Level 3 reported far less. In an email, Dale Drew, chief security officer at Level 3 Communications, confirmed it had "witnessed an attack against a telecommunications company in Liberia" from the Mirai botnet.
Far less than 1.24 Tbps, and no facts cited to even make it more than 620 Gbps. There is no actual data in the article to justify the claimed size, irrespective of the bad math. So, Zack Whittaker at ZDNet needs to go back to school to learn basic math and to not include speculative figures that he made out of his head, without citing any facts to justify them, in his clickbait "reports."
F'ing internet. This is a story worthy of Facebook, not slashdot ... at least not the old slashdot at the turn of the century.
After that, it's up for review by the Department of Redundancy Department.
Infinite recursion. That's why they always look like they're going around chasing their tails.
Again, read what I wrote4. I never said that there is no such thing as corrupt unions, just that they're needed to counterbalance the power of corporations in our current oligarchy. And even Jimmy Carter admits that the US is an oligarchy - which was inevitable with the Citizens United judgment. You now get the best (if you're a business owner) government money can buy.
Also, you are either incredibly naive or incredibly stupid to write "Once a union has achieved the purpose for which it was formed, it should be disbanded". If that were the case, we could disband the fire department once there are no fires, the police department once we go a while with no crime, the FAA when we go a year with no crashes, etc. Companies do not miraculously have a "come to Jeebus" moment and go forth and sin no more.
And no, it's non-union companies that have a short6er lifetime, because there are so many more of them. They never achieve the critical mass to have a union, but that doesn't prevent them from closing up shop because they're simply not competitive. 8 out of 10 businesses fail within 18 months
According to Bloomberg, 8 out of 10 entrepreneurs who start businesses fail within the first 18 months. A whopping 80% crash and burn.
We don't here of most of them because they're (1) small, (2) haven't been around long enough to make a dent in the market, (3) are shoestring operations, which never get to the point where the operators see the need for incorporating because it's not doing well enough to even bother making that investment.
As for stating "What good does that serve any worker?" - I was a member of the steelworkers and they definitely negotiated better working conditions and pay, and the company not only survived, it grew. Also, I was one person away from the legal minimum to receive legal recognition as a programmer's union. I failed because others were afraid of reprisals, even though there are fines for reprisals, etc., and compensation paid to affected employees. Most programmers are chicken-shit; serves them right when they have to train their overseas replacements to take over their jobs.
Work-alikes are allowed. However, in the case you cite they also copied creative elements that are non-functional in terms of copyright, such as the size of the field and the shape of the blocks. Using pentominoes instead of tetrominoes would be non-infringing. The underlying game play would be the same, and it's not like they can copyright the rules of the game - the USPTO says that the actual rules cannot be copyrighted - they are facts. Only the expression of those rules (the words used to describe the rules) can be copyrighted - anyone can publish the same rules using different words.
Considering the mix of Window, Frame, and JFrame classes, it should be cleaned up by just having Dialog and Window classes, same as other languages, with the JFrame and Frame being subsumed by Window, and Window being replaced by Dialog. There are plenty of other "mistakes" wrt naming.
Also, the gang of four are full of shit. You can take anything too far, and they are a great example of that. Their "design patterns" is a trap. It invites rigidity in design and implementation that gets in the way of doing the right thing. Same as Java's moronic "everything is a class" approach is equally a straight jacket that invites class explosion.
You're living in the past, and probably have never belonged to a union..Unions frequently represent every non-management employee, not just one specific position or trade. And if the company can't afford to pay a living wage, why should they exist? Someone else will come along and take their customers, and if they don't pay a living wage the process will just repeat itself until competition is reduced enough, or they become more efficient, and can pay a living wage.
Power structures do indeed corrupt, which is why unions are needed to counterbalance the power of employers.
It's not inevitable. When a company dies, for example, the local union also ceases to exist. It's the union version of creative destruction - something better just might come out of the wreckage.
And if you don't like the corruption, then run, FFS, instead of just whining about it. And if it isn't your union, then STFU, because it's not your duty to save others from their own cowardice and stupidity. They will have to learn the hard way, and you are interfering with the process, keeping them dependent on outside help.
We ARE rational actors. When we stick our finger into a lightbulb socket, we eventually learn not to do it because we are rational. We see the connection between the act and the pain.
As someone who, as a child, used to repeatedly stick his fingers into a specific wall socket whenever we'd go to visit our "rural country" relations I can vouch that THAT is not a good example of human rationality.
Do you still do it? If not, is it because you're aware of what can happen? If so, you are acting rationally.
Our hardest decisions require us to do what's rational despite what our emotions say. I didn't want to put my 13-year-old dog down, but I let rationality win over emotion.
But it still hurt emotionally, didn't it?
Sure but the point is, despite the emotional pain, we can, and do, act rationally.
BTW, rationality doesn't require a sane mind. People who are held to be non criminally responsible can still act rationally, same as those who suffer from delusions. Just not in all areas.
it gets hard to simply form coherent sentences when enraged
If that's the case for you, I would suggest you seek help. I certainly have no problem forming complete, rational sentences under the worst conditions, and I'm sure I'm not the only one.
Knowing one's own errors and limitations does not mean being free of them. Particularly when they are a central part of the whole "being human" thing.
My dog died a couple of weeks ago. He was 13, and I had him since he was a puppy. Even while I'm sitting with him as they inject the drugs, I'm making a point of using what I learned from my cognitive behavioral therapist to realize that my thinking was distorted. He had a good life, and the 4000+ days we were together far, far outweighed the last few hours (and the last few hours were inevitable anyway - I knew that he wouldn't make it through another winter).
We most certainly can control our emotions. Just takes the right training. CBT is the only real working therapy for PTSD because it DOES let you control your emotions by seeing how things really are, rather than focusing on the immediate anxiety and distress.
Of course, there are times when just saying "Fuck you" and walking away is the best reaction. It is the quickest way to ensure you don't re-engage with assholes. Emotional responses can also be rational responses, if they achieve the desired outcome. And achieving the desired, optimal outcome is the only valid measuring stick for both rational and emotional responses.
"Android Java" was never designed to create Java applications, and to this day it doesn't. Think of it as a cross-compiler. And killing off the cumbersome Java API and the need for interfaces because Java lacks multiple inheritance would be a good thing.
So just don't call it Java. It's not like the whole thing can't be reverse engineered, same as the original IBM PC BIOS was. And while doing so, clean up all the sh*t in the "complete implementation including all its required interfaces and functionality." Add a macro preprocessor and the ability to have executable functions outside of any class (why not??? Many languages manage that) and who cares? It will be obviously so not like Java in it's way of working (where everything is a class is a crappy model, made worse by interfaces instead of multiple inheritance) and compile to real platform-specific binaries FTW.
Since (only a subset of) the Java language is used to produce byte code for the ART, and not Java classes, there's no reason that Google can't just use only a subset of another language to the same effect - C++, Object Pascal, even a bastardized version of BASIC or Hypercard/Hypertalk and its descendants. Or something completely new ...
How else would I prove interconnections between political surrogates, then?
Whether you can prove it or not won't change anything. Not even if the whole world just accepts it uncritically at face value. As such, it's irrelevant to all those who don't want to invest their time in mental masturbation. You're as bad as the SJWs. And as irrelevant.
Since the database of public filings, financial disclosures, and members of boards of directors is of necessity not complete, then the "deductions" reflect the biases of the people who curated the data.
You go on and on about communism being a failed ideology. You ignore socialism, probably because it's more responsive to the will of the people than either communism or capitalism. Why?
And what the hell does communism have to do with Muslims? There's no correlation.
with the full support of western leftist feminists..
I guess you didn't get the memo. 1st wave, 2nd wave, and 3rd wave feminism are dead. 4th wave is just irrelevant except to those who make coin fomenting stupidity. The rest of us just want people to treat each other as equals regardless of gender, without resorting to the all-to-frequent male-bashing.